As an unemployed job seeker, and a healthy proponent of privacy, this impacts me directly.What will I say if (when?) I am asked this?...

When Justin Bassett interviewed for a new job, he expected the usual questions about experience and references. So he was astonished when the interviewer asked for something else: his Facebook username and password.

N.O.Period.My Facebook password is the functional equivalent to the front door to my house.You do not have any right to come through it unless you are invited by me or are a vetted authority with the proper search warrants.As bad as I'd like a job right now, I'm with the first guy; do I really want to work for somebody with a cavalier attitude about invading my personal space?

Yeah... I saw that. Its wrong, but it's also hard to stand up for these things when your livelihood is on the line. My solution (and it's been my solution before this problem) is the reduction of internet footprint. My name is in little use on the internet- I live behind my S/N. So when asked for something like this, I'd say, "I don't have one."

I had a prospective client ask if he could friend me on Facebook. Supposedly to "better keep in touch."

I told him I didn't have a Facebook account. Or a Twitter account. Or a Google+ account. (I really don't BTW.) I told him I basically don't like social media and don't participate in any of it. I offered him my e-mail address instead.

His reaction was interesting. Without coming right out and saying it, he implied I was lying to him. "Everybody has a Facebook account," he told me. When I said "not me" he smiled and said, "Yeah right."

I didn't get the project that day. But I did add a new name to my 'bozo' list. About 3 months later, when he called me back about something else, I told him I was too busy to take on any additional projects at that point.

Yeah...well...maybe I did give him one of our throwaway e-mail accounts because of his tone. And the way the meeting was going. Figured I could always give him one of our 'real client' mailbox addresses later on if he ever became one.

Its wrong, but it's also hard to stand up for these things when your livelihood is on the line.

Bingo, I'm totally with you, and I feel very sorry for the poor saps that rolled over and gave it up.BUT, call me a whatever you call those sorts of people, but a line MUST be drawn, or the tin-foil hat crowd is right, and this country is turning into a communist regime run by a trifecta of banks, big government, and multinational corporations and we are just little piggies that must be hiding something if we refuse to be probed.

Oh, wait...

On second thought, screw those poor saps that caved, they deserve every bit of humiliation they're entitled to.It's because of that attitude that our personal freedoms in this country and others are eroding faster than we can secure it.Keep up the pretenses of a rotten economy, and people will be willing to part with every drop of integrity they once held so dear, in exchange for crumbs of safety and security.

It's because of that attitude that our personal freedoms in this country and others are eroding faster than we can secure it.Keep up the pretenses of a rotten economy, and people will be willing to part with every drop of integrity they once held so dear, in exchange for crumbs of safety and security.

Mine too. It's a hard truth, but there's no way to buy yourself out of that sort of abuse. The more you're willing to give up, the more the demands will keep escalating.

I've always maintained there's two general types of people you'll find in any negotiation. One type sees a concession as part of the give and take that occurs when there's some degree of respect between the two parties involved. The other type sees any concession as a sign of weakness - and immediately goes for the jugular vein.

And as far as economic justifications go, about all I can say (having on more than one occasion made what many would consider a "bad economic decision" based purely on principle) is at least try not to sell yourself out too cheaply. Not that it will ultimately matter. Because:

"In an ugly and unhappy world the richest man can purchase nothing but ugliness and unhappiness." - G.G. Shaw

As an unemployed job seeker, and a healthy proponent of privacy, this impacts me directly.What will I say if (when?) I am asked this?...

When Justin Bassett interviewed for a new job, he expected the usual questions about experience and references. So he was astonished when the interviewer asked for something else: his Facebook username and password.

N.O.Period.My Facebook password is the functional equivalent to the front door to my house.You do not have any right to come through it unless you are invited by me or are a vetted authority with the proper search warrants.As bad as I'd like a job right now, I'm with the first guy; do I really want to work for somebody with a cavalier attitude about invading my personal space?

App had posted something about this on Google+, and then I heard it again on NPR. This is pure evil. I hope and pray I am never so desperate for work, that I would have any response other than something to the extent of "Sorry, I thought you were a legitimate company, but you've wasted my time. Good-bye."

We now have the opportunity to write our elected representatives, to have it added to the list of prohibited questions to ask during interviews, like religion, marital status, etc. I can't imagine on what grounds it would be objected to by any political party. Making it illegal won't stop it altogether, of course, but should put a dent in it. I don't know that there is an epidemic of this kind of thing out there, but may as well "nip it in the bud" as we say where I'm from.

I had a prospective client ask if he could friend me on Facebook. Supposedly to "better keep in touch."

I told him I didn't have a Facebook account. Or a Twitter account. Or a Google+ account. (I really don't BTW.) I told him I basically don't like social media and don't participate in any of it. I offered him my e-mail address instead.

Can't speak for anyone but myself, but I have been in such bad spots. And I acted according to my own sense of values and morality. But I also have an advantage in that my family operates as a unit. We discuss things with each other and we agree, as a group, on what our major courses of action and options are. We share the decisions, and we share the consequences - as well as the rewards that come out of them.

It might be different if you're in a family that has the traditional "breadwinner/dependents" situation where one person is looked to and expected to always decide and make things happen. But I wouldn't know. My grandparents ran their home as a community. My parents ran the house I grew up in that way. And now my family unit runs ours the same. And it works for us just like it did the previous two as well as the next generation I have direct experience with.

I also agree there's no need to criticize somebody for lying down if they believe they need to. (I cut some of Edvard's comment out of the portion I agreed with and quoted.) But it still doesn't make it right. Possibly it's necessary. (Maybe.) But it's seldom right. That's the difference between sometimes doing what's expedient vs doing what's right.

I also can't agree that these battles can be nothing more than Pyrrhic victories at best. Caving in on something you know is not right only sets the stage for bigger problems down the road. And many times, all it takes to bring about major change is one person standing up and saying "No. I'm not going to accept that." At least if history is anything to go by.

Regarding the argument of having a family to feed, about all I can say is I hear that bandied about as the grand excuse so often that I'm immediately skeptical of about half the people who say it. Sometimes it really is true. Up to a point. But most often it's just shorthand for: I'm watching out for myself, and I don't care what anybody thinks - or who else gets hurt. So piss off. Oh! And did I tell you I also have kids?

At the end of the day, I think it probably all comes down to what you really believe and value. And how you see the world. I personally refuse to accept the notion that I'm helpless and have no options. Because in the final analysis you always have the option to say "No!"

What you have to decide is how important it is - and how much you're willing to pay for saying it.

Yeah, perhaps I was a bit harsh, but it's gotta be said.If people would just stand against it, everybody, every time, this would never happen again and the world would be better for it.As it is, it DOES happen and the more it happens, the sooner we will find egregious invasion of privacy today will be standard policy tomorrow that we set in stone with our own cowardice.

For the record, I have a lovely industrious and creative wife, and a handsome intelligent son who is hardworking and curious.Long ago, we made the decision that my wife was going to stay home and be the proverbial housewife and we also made the choice to homeschool our son, so if anybody's in the hotseat if this choice ever needs to be made, it's me.

It was my precious wife who sent me the article in the first place, with the tagline "Isn't this freaky?"; the implication being "You wouldn't cave in to that, would you?"She's well-acquainted with the importance of drawing lines, especially when the wider implications are so much worse than the temporary outlook.

Id ask for their bank PIN number...when told no, I would say...once you give me that, you can have my facebook password (To the account I am going to setup specifically for this purpose, where all posts will be set to never show to anybody, I will add no friends, and like every dodgy underground network I can find).

Already prepared. I can swear on a lie detector that the password to my Facebook account (one that's existed for many years) is ******* Now, you work out which of my many accounts that is, and then work out why I set up an account and then abandoned it, after accepting the likes of 'Jimmy Cocksnot' (not made up)

If that question comes to me, I'll walk out. Seriously, I have done that before when asked too much personal questions and that too during recession time. If my family members asks me for social network pass of my account, I'll deny, sorry but that's how I play.

Recruitment doesn't mean revealing your personal details too much just for the sake of job. In that case prostitution should be glamorous corporate job.

If that question comes to me, I'll walk out. Seriously, I have done that before when asked too much personal questions and that too during recession time. If my family members asks me for social network pass of my account, I'll deny, sorry but that's how I play.

Recruitment doesn't mean revealing your personal details too much just for the sake of job. In that case prostitution should be glamorous corporate job.

If that question comes to me, I'll walk out. Seriously, I have done that before when asked too much personal questions and that too during recession time. If my family members asks me for social network pass of my account, I'll deny, sorry but that's how I play.

Recruitment doesn't mean revealing your personal details too much just for the sake of job. In that case prostitution should be glamorous corporate job.

I could understand someone asking this, on the basis of needing to know how security conscious a person is, if the job requires said person to be dealing with passwords to the companies personal details or something similar...obviously if they DID give their password, tell them never to do it again, change it, and refuse them the job...I can honestly see NO other reason for this to be asked...and I am sure there are better ways to find out how easy someone will give out sensitive information.

In the article, the example was given of police recruits. They were being checked for gang affiliation, underage contacts, etc.Perhaps those are legitimate concerns, but what if I happened to like Ice-T's music and listed him as one of my favorite artists? What if I was a youth group leader or a little league coach?

Say no on principle - that should go without saying. But say no for a very practical reason too - if that's how an employer treats you as an applicant, how the hell do you imagine they'll treat you as an employee? As several here have commented, it's those who give in who are the problem - if every applicant says no, then the employer must reconsider or do without employees.

That said, it's just one more example of discrimination of a kind still taken for granted a lot of the time. I've been refused jobs in Scotland that simply weren't open to 'the b@st@rd English'. Twice refused jobs with local education authorities because I'm an atheist. And I've actually walked out on interviews when I was asked if my application was 'on the square'. And even in work, I've had more than a few head to heads because I regarded my mobile phone number and email address ('purely for the record') as none of my employers' damn business.

I can remember one colleague who asked me what made me such a troublemaker. I answered that standing next to people like him did it every time. When people stare at their feet and mumble excuses, the first guy to speak up (usually the same guy as last time) is a troublemaker. But even more than the quietly acquiescent, I've never had time for the "I don't mind really" people - those who excuse the inexcusable rather than look in their bathroom mirrors each morning and ask themselves why they're so weak.

He who would exchange essential liberty for temporary safety.... etc etc.

Its wrong, but it's also hard to stand up for these things when your livelihood is on the line.

Bingo, I'm totally with you, and I feel very sorry for the poor saps that rolled over and gave it up.BUT, call me a whatever you call those sorts of people, but a line MUST be drawn, or the tin-foil hat crowd is right, and this country is turning into a communist regime run by a trifecta of banks, big government, and multinational corporations and we are just little piggies that must be hiding something if we refuse to be probed.

Oh, wait...

On second thought, screw those poor saps that caved, they deserve every bit of humiliation they're entitled to.It's because of that attitude that our personal freedoms in this country and others are eroding faster than we can secure it.Keep up the pretenses of a rotten economy, and people will be willing to part with every drop of integrity they once held so dear, in exchange for crumbs of safety and security.

Well, you save me a lot of typing because you said pretty much everything I was going to say, like you were in my mind.... Hmmmm... For those that "bend over" and conform, I say "You are all sheeple". There is no way in hell I'd give my private info to anyone. I'd starve and live on the streets before that happened... If nothing else I can add a quote that pretty much spells it out:Benjamin Franklin said it best..."Those who give up their freedom in the name of security deserve neither freedom nor security."